delander † Posted April 23, 2011 Share #1 Posted April 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm facing the purchase of a scanner mainly for B&W 35mm. I've read up on the Epsons and the Plustek. I have seen some comments here on the Canon 9000F (not positive) but wonder if anyone using this scanner for some time has a more informed opinion. Any help much appreciated. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 23, 2011 Posted April 23, 2011 Hi delander †, Take a look here Scanning - Canoscan 9000f?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Doc Henry Posted April 23, 2011 Share #2 Posted April 23, 2011 Jeff, I personally do not have that scanner, but I have seen here: Scanner Review: CanoScan 9000F that compares with the Epson V600. Scanned images appear to be correct (see the pattern of colors) but perhaps someone here who have this scanner at home, can answer you But for your information , i opened a thread for the Epson V700 vs Nikonscan here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/160651-epson-v700-750-very-good-our-10.html Best Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted April 23, 2011 Author Share #3 Posted April 23, 2011 Hi Henry, I have seen that review also but it does not tell me enough? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hiles Posted April 23, 2011 Share #4 Posted April 23, 2011 I have a Canon 8800F. I know, different is not the same. My 8800F is excellent. I have tried Vuescan (which seems very good), but I think the Canon software is as good. I scan lots of 35mm B&W, a little Colour Negative and some Kodachrome. All work very well. Many here will say rude things about flat bed scanners. I have never made side-by-side comparisons my self, and I don't believe comparisons that are NOT comparisons, and assertions without evidence. I can say I am very happy. If you look at my pictures on this forum, they have all been scanned by a Canon flatbed (many by an 8400F and many more by the 8800F). You may not like my pictures, but it is hard to say they are technically shoddy. When I compare scans I have made of negatives that have also been scanned by my local photo specialty shop on their high end Nikon dedicated scanner, I can't see any difference on my screen between their files and my files at equivalent magnifications. Perhaps someone else might see a difference, but I can't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 25, 2011 Share #5 Posted April 25, 2011 I'm afraid my results scanning slides with the Canon 9000 were less than pleasing -- they just looked fuzzy and blotchy, and sadly not up to the Leica lenses. I took it back. I would really encourage anyone contemplating one to think very hard before shelling out. I am sure they are fine for scanning prints and other material. Perhaps a dedicated film scanner (Plustek seems to get a good write-up) would be better for film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share #6 Posted April 25, 2011 Thanks David Your comments on the canoscan 9000f have worried me as I was quite keen to get one. this link Shutterbug: New Canon CanoScan 9000F & SilverFast has a favourable review of the scanner and the reviewer knows what he is doing. At the end he comments that the scans need more software sharpening but does not seem to regard that as a problem. At the moment I cant decide between the Epson 700, the Canoscan and the Plustek 7600i. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hiles Posted April 25, 2011 Share #7 Posted April 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I mentioned above that my experience with Canoscans has been good. I certainly believe that other have not had my good experience, but I would like to see some examples of their unsuccessful scans. 1. Kodacolor negative 2. & 3. Kodachrome 4. Ektachrome Phototshop manipulation is minimal - a very little sharpening, and maybe a modest contrast adjustment. If there were something inherently wrong with the scanner, I could not get results like this. Buy what you want - but there is nothing much wrong with the Canoscans. If I can do it so can you. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/149941-scanning-canoscan-9000f/?do=findComment&comment=1655261'>More sharing options...
too old to care Posted April 25, 2011 Share #8 Posted April 25, 2011 I do not know if this will help you or not, especially since I do not have a 9000F, but instead the 8800F. But here are two examples. The first photo is with the Canon, second with a Plustek 7600. The Canon was set at 4800 dpi because if I went any bigger the file size became too large to work with. The Plustek was set at 7200 dpi with 4 scans, which from what I read here is actually about 3200 dpi. I could get the colors closer between the two shots in PS, but that is not the question in my mind, sharpness is. Sharpening was turned on with the Canon and off with the Plustek. Even with this, the Plustek is sharper. Hope this helps. In defense of the Canon, my luck with the Canon for slides has been better with it than the Plustek, but not for color or B&W negatives. It is also easier to use (Silverfast vs Canon software) and the batch scanning is great. I can only assume that the 9000F is better than the 8800F. Wayne Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/149941-scanning-canoscan-9000f/?do=findComment&comment=1655549'>More sharing options...
delander † Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share #9 Posted April 25, 2011 Thanks the Plustek certainly looks much sharper. The problem is that the Canoscan 9000f does not seems to be selling very well as everyone has the previous 8800f. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted April 25, 2011 Share #10 Posted April 25, 2011 I have been following all of the scanner threads as I am looking to replace my Epson Perfection 3200. The only software I can get it to work with on Vista and Windows 7 is Vuescan and whilst results are reasonable for web-use, I feel that the negs from my M7 deserve better. The scans of the 6x6cm negs from my Rolleicord Vb are (as one would expect) somewhat more reasonable. Currently and for the foreseeable future I am concentrating on b&w films so tend to ignore the colour questions and am looking at the resolution aspects and capabilities to hold negatives as flat as possible The images from Michael H's Canon 9000F look very impressive (on a monitor) so it has been added to my short list of Epson 600, 700, 750 and Plustek 7600i. I am tempted by the Plustek but that would mean keeping the 3200 for the 6x6cm negs. It is all quite difficult: hardware - Epson -v- Canon -v- Plustek : 35mm + 6x6cm -v- dedicated 35mm : software - Epson -v- Canonscan -v- Silverfast -v- Vuescan. Argghhh! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 26, 2011 Share #11 Posted April 26, 2011 Found them! Of course viewing on a monitor introduces another variable. Best is projected on a big screen! Below, first ones from the Canon 9000F, second lot are scanned professionally with a Noritsu scanner (cheapest option; for custom scans they use an Imacon, or did until the lab closed). When viewed closely, the Canon has dust on the glass, would be easy to clean, but I'm not happy with marks from the Noritsu either -- and some scans have exhibited horizontal banding. Grain is visible on the Noritsu; the Canon has automatically reduced it -- but at the expense of considerable loss of detail and clarity. I prefer the Canon colors, though. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/149941-scanning-canoscan-9000f/?do=findComment&comment=1655804'>More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 26, 2011 Share #12 Posted April 26, 2011 And two more. Shot on M6, 2.8/24 Elmarit-ASPH, E100. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/149941-scanning-canoscan-9000f/?do=findComment&comment=1655805'>More sharing options...
delander † Posted April 26, 2011 Author Share #13 Posted April 26, 2011 Thanks David for taking the time to show these. Can the automatic grain reduction of the Canon be turned off? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted April 26, 2011 Author Share #14 Posted April 26, 2011 Just ordered the Plustek, too much doubt about the quality of the scans produced by the Canoscan 9000f and I don't need anything other than 35mm. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
too old to care Posted April 26, 2011 Share #15 Posted April 26, 2011 Thanks David for taking the time to show these. Can the automatic grain reduction of the Canon be turned off? Jeff I know you asked David, but I would like to respond for the 8800F. Below are the settings for the scan I posted from the Canon. Grain Correction was set to None. Options are None, Low, Medium, High. I too would like to see the options from the 9000F. I am still looking for a scanner to do 6x6 negatives. The 8800F does not bring out the details on them that I want and the Plustek will only take 35mm. I am leaning towards adding an Epson 750 and getting rid of the 8800F. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/149941-scanning-canoscan-9000f/?do=findComment&comment=1656179'>More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 26, 2011 Share #16 Posted April 26, 2011 Thanks David for taking the time to show these. Can the automatic grain reduction of the Canon be turned off? Jeff Don't have the software any more, but as I recall the settings were the same as for the 8800f, As Too Old to Care kindly demonstrated. I tried various settings, but couldn't really sharpen it up any more. I'd be very interested to hear how you go with the Plustek -- please post some pics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
too old to care Posted April 26, 2011 Share #17 Posted April 26, 2011 Just ordered the Plustek, too much doubt about the quality of the scans produced by the Canoscan 9000f and I don't need anything other than 35mm. Jeff Ok, now take your time to learn the Plustek's ups and downs. Silverfast works well for me, but it takes time to master, I know because I am still working on mastering it. Vuescan works well for some others, but not from me. Also, be sure that you have the latest downloads for the drivers. There were some errors but they have been fixed and available online. And, enjoy the Plustek, I do, plus lets see some scans. Wayne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.